World Restructuring

[Grim West.3194]

Thank you.

[Tibicia.8315]

My server is my guild. I know who I can count on, who has my back... The server partnerships have been difficult enough. This feels a bit like Edge of the Mists.

[Thei.6901]

@Gaile Gray.6029 said:A message from McKenna Berdrow:the system is far long in the development process.

I don't know if you are aware, but even the salt forums are dead, which is pretty good indication of how alive wvw is. Is this going to be released before everyone quits this game though?The idea seems pretty good to me, pretty much what we have been suggesting in the past 4-5 years and now you finally wake up to implement it? Huh.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@"Lonami.2987" said:A few important points I feel need to be addressed:

• Alliances need to be bigger. Only 1000 member is not enough. Lot of guilds have people that don't play WvW, forcing us to kick them out would be lame as hell.
• Pips shouldn't reset weekly, but every 8 weeks instead, more like PvP seasons. Weekly reset is very punishing for those who can't play often.
• Server identity shouldn't be lost in the process. Create new banners to rally around, for those who want it, something like preset alliances. Those who don't want to stick to a default flag can still stay random. Or just make a new system, where you can join a faction, or stay as a mercenary, with different bonuses. Alliances can then become a new faction or stay mercenary. Assigning players 100% randomly to a server is not a good idea.
• Languages should be part of that "rally around" element. I want to play with Spaniards, but if we get random people from random languages, WvW will become a mess. Let people choose a default language to join. Maybe even support languages that the game isn't localized for. I don't know what's the situation, but I heard there's unofficial Russian and Italian servers, where players of those languages gather. Remember that not everyone knows English, even if that's the language they're playing at.
• Give PvE a look too. The community aspect of PvE servers was lost with megaservers, and now that servers are completely gone, it could be a good opportunity to apply these WvW changes to PvE as well. At least, make sure to keep some language preference factor for PvE.
• Making matches last 8 weeks sounds insane. 1-2 weeks would be better, no one wants to be playing against the same enemies for 8 weeks.

That's it, for now. Really surprised and happy about the switch to alliances, been part of the crowd asking for it since ages ago, but never felt like we would ever get it.

1) Only the active WvW members count towards that limit, it has been stated before.2) Agree.3) You'll have allegiance to your alliance.4) It is already...5) Was it though? The PvE community is quite strong and you have awesome initiatives like the community World Boss kills, and PINK guild hosting portals for hours on daily JP's. Megaservers improved the community aspect, if anything.6) I actually think 8 weeks is way to short. (Did you even read the dev posts?) The 8 weeks isn't vs the same enemy, the 8 weeks is the time between new world shuffles.As in you'll be in World X for 8 weeks, fighting one-up, one-down opponents like currently, every week. But after 8 weeks it resets everything again, and you get reassigned to a new world.

If you had read the dev posts you'd have seen that most of your concerns were addressed earlier.

@Redseven.3985 said:

@Raymond Lukes.6305 said:

@"Phlogistn.7893" said:I realize that many servers no longer feel they have an "identity". That is not, I feel, the case for Tarnished Coast and some other servers I know of. Some people have been on their server since day one, have friends across guilds and have a history. Although "something" needed to be done with WvW I am sad to think that all the people we play with here will be dispersed to the winds. Even stating they can be in an "alliance" with alliances changing from season to season, makes the continuity of community null. Baby, bathwater.....

F L Ö Guild Leader/Commander Valkyrja Söngur [ODIN], a Tarnished Coast Server Admin

Alliances don't change unless you change them. Alliances are groups of guilds that want to play together. They will be limited in size but will remain together as long as the members of the alliance want.

Except an alliance is only 500-1000 people. Our community on Desolation is far more than this number. So all of the people not privileged enough to enter this select group are thrown to the wind, friends and teammates you might have known for years and years, potentially enemies. Moreover, there are "enemy" guilds whom we have fought for years and years, and now suddenly might be on the same world, expected to work together?? You need to go the other direction and bring back server pride, not delete servers.

How many guilds does that community have that are full and all of them have 100% WvW participation?

[Turin.6921]

@"Lonami.2987" said:A few important points I feel need to be addressed:

• Alliances need to be bigger. Only 1000 member is not enough. Lot of guilds have people that don't play WvW, forcing us to kick them out would be lame as hell.

Only the ppl that set a guild as their WvW are active. Non WvW ppl should have this deactivated and they would not be calculated in the guild population.

• Server identity shouldn't be lost in the process. Create new banners to rally around, for those who want it, something like preset alliances. Those who don't want to stick to a default flag can still stay random. Or just make a new system, where you can join a faction, or stay as a mercenary, with different bonuses. Alliances can then become a new faction or stay mercenary. Assigning players 100% randomly to a server is not a good idea.\

That would defeat the purpose of this whole system. Whatever is left of server loyatly will be gone but that can be easily replaced with alliance loyalty.

• Languages should be part of that "rally around" element. I want to play with Spaniards, but if we get random people from random languages, WvW will become a mess. Let people choose a default language to join. Maybe even support languages that the game isn't localized for. I don't know what's the situation, but I heard there's unofficial Russian and Italian servers, where players of those languages gather. Remember that not everyone knows English, even if that's the language they're playing at.

It is very clearly stated in the OP and later replies that preferred language will be a factor in creating worlds.

• Give PvE a look too. The community aspect of PvE servers was lost with megaservers, and now that servers are completely gone, it could be a good opportunity to apply these WvW changes to PvE as well. At least, make sure to keep some language preference factor for PvE.

I am not sure this needed that much unless there is more guild content in PvE. PvE guilds already have their own alliances and communities both for raiding and in the open world. Not sure what this would add to PvE.

[gnollbane.3620]

@McKenna Berdrow.2759 said:

@Kabar Jaw.4670 said:So if a guild has a large population but only a portion of that guild actually plays WvW, would they have to make a new guild in order to keep the population accurate?

No. Only players who set that guild as their WvW guild will count towards that guilds WvW population.

Does this mean that an inactive player can log in and set their guild as their wvw guild for x alliance and count for their population?

[B O N K.6210]

What happens if the guilds in an alliance are slightly bigger than the cap?? Then some players from those guilds would be locked out of their own alliance and not able to play with their own guild. This whole idea sounds like it will create more problems than it will solve. Not to mention the rise of rampant elitism, alliance shifting, arguments among alliances, lack of a solid WvW identity for players, etc.... There are numerous pitfalls in this system. Why can't you simply balance the worlds already in place? I am JQ... I don't want to be anything other than JQ. I have pride in my server and pride in my guild. You guys want to destroy that?? You would be far better off simply breaking up the overpowered servers and rebalancing the current system.

[Swamurabi.7890]

@Drinks.2361 said:

@Swamurabi.7890 said:

@Drinks.2361 said:So there is a pile of people in this thread worrying about "top tier alliances", why do you even think there will be anything like tiers? We'll just get a matchup & that's it, there will be no relationship between the different matchups & the sides will be shuffled before the next match starts.

So many people that have left for other games are excited for this, there are piles of games out there that have slightly different versions of open world PvE & raids but WvW really sets this game apart. Hopefully we'll see enough support to make a real competitive scene out of it.

You will see 4 timezone alliances compete for the top tier with 3 timezone alliances being in the next tier on down to one timezone alliances in the bottom tier.

The good thing is that unlike servers being locked, alliances will have the opportunity to recruit to fill their coverage gaps.The other good thing is that the players that do return won't overstack an already overstacked side.

The bad is that the alliance might have to kick some guilds out to make room for the new recruits to fill coverage gaps.The other bad is that there will probably still be matches, particularly in lower tiers, where alliances have little or no coverage and can't get players to fill the gaps.

I think you're greatly overestimating the size of each alliance relative to the overall 8 week world. There is no reason for Anet to allow Alliances to be so large that they can manipulate the matchups

I'm sure Mal is already hard at work creating a 4 timezone 500 player guild.

[jamesdolla.3954]

Can you release this now plz?

[Deniara Devious.3948]

The proposed solution is probably good for big active guilds, but very bad for small guilds, since you must select just 1 guild for WvWvW. Most players are would be wise and keen to choose a relatively big guild, otherwise it might be that in the worst case the only friends they have on the server are the members of their small guild.

I propose a change: Let each player choose multiple guilds, just like you can currently be member of up to 5 guilds. And this combined information (of up to 5 guilds) could be used to divide players to servers. Now the players could be an active member of several WvWvW guilds, including community guilds.

[Jen.6021]

Anet, thx for this, i actually love you guys doing something finally, but i have a few questions:

1) Im a leader of a small wvw guild, roaming/havoc oriented, less than 50, probs 25-30 very active, we will be always together? im worried about that.

2) I will be able to select be part of an alliance with "medium" population? lets say as a guild who likes small scale fights, we tend to avoid being in the actual Tier 1, because you know is full of blobs.

3) What if a guildie been gone, and suddenly came back to game, will be able to join our guild in mid of season?

4) What will happen with alliance leaders, and if they start to manipulate the alliance? Lets say some guilds will be more focused on the PPT game, but some others more about fights, how you will manage these possible dramas?

5) How many worlds will be created? How many alliances can be done? Who can start an alliance? i guess you cant let EVERY guild create a personal alliance

[Rampage.7145]

@Swamurabi.7890 said:

@Drinks.2361 said:

@Swamurabi.7890 said:

@Drinks.2361 said:So there is a pile of people in this thread worrying about "top tier alliances", why do you even think there will be anything like tiers? We'll just get a matchup & that's it, there will be no relationship between the different matchups & the sides will be shuffled before the next match starts.

So many people that have left for other games are excited for this, there are piles of games out there that have slightly different versions of open world PvE & raids but WvW really sets this game apart. Hopefully we'll see enough support to make a real competitive scene out of it.

You will see 4 timezone alliances compete for the top tier with 3 timezone alliances being in the next tier on down to one timezone alliances in the bottom tier.

The good thing is that unlike servers being locked, alliances will have the opportunity to recruit to fill their coverage gaps.The other good thing is that the players that do return won't overstack an already overstacked side.

The bad is that the alliance might have to kick some guilds out to make room for the new recruits to fill coverage gaps.The other bad is that there will probably still be matches, particularly in lower tiers, where alliances have little or no coverage and can't get players to fill the gaps.

I think you're greatly overestimating the size of each alliance relative to the overall 8 week world. There is no reason for Anet to allow Alliances to be so large that they can manipulate the matchups

I'm sure Mal is already hard at work creating a 4 timezone 500 player guild.

Mal dosnt really give a fuck about none of that anymore he barelly play this game only with his guild nowdays i mean, nobody gives a fuck about that kind of shit except for BG (maybe) people tbh

[Blaeys.3102]

If they had implemented this on day one, I could see it working. But, after five years, many people have developed multiple ties to different communities on their server. It isn't uncommon for someone to WvW with one guild on Monday and one with a different playstyle on Tuesday.

Under the proposed system, that will be pretty much gone for all practical purposes. Because of alliance limits, most harder core wvw guilds will be very picky about who is (and who isn't) in their alliance. The people running the alliance will have no choice but to look for the most competitive guilds to group with - regardless of how tight their current communities are. The players that join them for a night or two - and then run with more casual groups later in the week (and there are a lot more of these kinds of wvwers than you might think) - will now be forced to either make a larger commitment to WvW or risk missing out entirely.

In the past five years, servers have banded together. They have bought expensive teamspeak servers and websites. They have set up fun little theme nights for less hardcore players. They have built ties based around things other than how good a player someone is.

The proposed alliance system will harm that. Again, if it had been like this from day one, it wouldn't be an issue. But asking this of the community five years in makes me think that Anet has grown out of touch with the real in-game communities (which aren't really represented here on the wvw forums, btw).

[Grim West.3194]

As long as they keep alliances from being too large this could work.

Otherwise, large alliances will just become the new BG.

[Chaba.5410]

@"zerorogue.9410" said:Yes alliances will allow SOME of the people you've seen, but they are limited and people will have to be cut out to keep them.

Guild and alliance size limits are high enough.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunbar%27s_number

[Mini Crinny.6190]

I'm pretty sure there are people posting on this that in the past when anet has implemented a change to WvW have said that we should give it a try and find out when its rolled out.. so lets give this a try and find out what its like when its rolled out :)

[SnowPumpkin.1809]

@Rampage.7145 said:

@Roxanne.6140 said:

@Nocturnal Lunacy.8563 said:The adult in me is excited over what wvw is about to become, but the child in me is suicidal over what wvw will become.But seriously anet, I'm feeling like this is going to push the last remaining roamers from wvw. What about the players that don't want to join guilds but like playing with certain individuals in guilds? Or like to run around with certain guilds but doesnt want to join any guilds? I feel we are being forced to join guilds and alliances or get thrown into the manure pile.

I agree with you. I know of many others who do not want to join a guild but enjoy running with them and these people are not low-skilled newbies at all. Now, they will mainly be used as fillers and thrown into the dailies people. How do you satisfy their expectations?

if you enjoy running with a guild just join them for kitten sake, how is that hard for anyone? honestly if you wanna be a pug then nobody really cares tbh, guilds are the blood and soul of WvW, sure pug commanders exist but most players in those zergs do belong to some guild that is not raiding at the time. withotu guilds and commanders there would not be no WvW, you would be sitting in EBG randomly skirmishing arround SMC and T3 keeps 24/7 how is that fun? You have to understand WvW dynamic and mechanics revolves arround guilds/commanders flipping stuff without them there is no WvW so yeah changes need to be made into keep the game healthy interesting and fun for those poeple in order for the game mode to even exist.

It's not that easy to just join any guild you want. You have to have an invite which means requesting one. If they don't have room or you may be to casual for them you are refused. You really like leaving this up to guild leaders to decide what happens to you?

[Arbriel.4397]

How will this new change affect my choice of playing GW2? For instance I don't only play WvW but I also play with other friends from across other worlds, with that gone how will I be able to play with them outside of WvW? And are we only getting to choose ONE guild or will we still have 5, but 1 can be a WvW guild?

[MaLeVoLenT.8129]

@Swamurabi.7890 said:

@Drinks.2361 said:

@Swamurabi.7890 said:

@Drinks.2361 said:So there is a pile of people in this thread worrying about "top tier alliances", why do you even think there will be anything like tiers? We'll just get a matchup & that's it, there will be no relationship between the different matchups & the sides will be shuffled before the next match starts.

So many people that have left for other games are excited for this, there are piles of games out there that have slightly different versions of open world PvE & raids but WvW really sets this game apart. Hopefully we'll see enough support to make a real competitive scene out of it.

You will see 4 timezone alliances compete for the top tier with 3 timezone alliances being in the next tier on down to one timezone alliances in the bottom tier.

The good thing is that unlike servers being locked, alliances will have the opportunity to recruit to fill their coverage gaps.The other good thing is that the players that do return won't overstack an already overstacked side.

The bad is that the alliance might have to kick some guilds out to make room for the new recruits to fill coverage gaps.The other bad is that there will probably still be matches, particularly in lower tiers, where alliances have little or no coverage and can't get players to fill the gaps.

I think you're greatly overestimating the size of each alliance relative to the overall 8 week world. There is no reason for Anet to allow Alliances to be so large that they can manipulate the matchups

I'm sure Mal is already hard at work creating a 4 timezone 500 player guild.

Even if I were, It wouldn't be nearly as effective as some are making this out to be. Which is the point behind introducing a system of this nature. It prevents the super stacking of any world. Now you can super stack an alliance sure. But that alliance only would equate for a very small portion of the server even if the alliance size were to be 1k. That 1k sized stacked alliance wouldn't be able to decide what other players and or alliances it gets paired with. defeating the purpose of even attempting to have full 24/7 time zone coverage within an alliance.

Instead what Mal is thinking is having an healthy alliance environment that doesnt necessarily focus on having all 4 timezones. But instead one that allows for my friends and player base to have activity when they specifically play. You see with alliances, someone like me doesn't have to worry about making an entire server healthy anymore because the system will make worlds every 8 weeks for me.

[SnowPumpkin.1809]

@davidiven.9408 said:if you still have server pride in current year, it's time to reevaluate your lifethis thread already turns into BG tears thread

I'm sorry but why does everyone assume the unhappy people are BG? I am not, I am EU. It seem to me like the people that are happy about the change are using that as an excuse to get the unhappy groups comments ignored!

[Wounder.7526]

Awesome idea, ANet! I would suggest that members of guilds in worlds currently 100% full could queue up for a transfer whenever the world moves to "Guild" joining level, 91-99%. I would also suggest that when you decide on a cap for the size of alliances, take player WvW activity into account, because a lot of guilds have lots of social members that don't do WvW regularly, and it would be bad if the system incentivized guilds to kick members to make more room for active players in their alliance.

[Molesworth.1684]

I have a bad feeling about this. It seems to follow Anet's recent trend of discriminating against the casual player, as raids do in pve. I am a keen and frequent wvw player but I don't belong to a wvw guild, and no longer want to. Many wvw guilds quite justifiably have a requirement to raid on certain days and at certain times, which I don't want to be tied to. As a pug, I can log in when I want and either roam or zerg as I choose. I don't want to endure training days and be criticised for my build. It's a game, not the army. I have a feeling this will result in my being thrown in the 'odds and ends bin' with all the rest of those without guilds, while the elite players group together on certain 'worlds'. Also, the loss of servers with longstanding identities makes the new system sound like a glorified EOTM. After 5 years of enjoying GW2, I fear this might finally make me quit. I would definitely prefer to carry on with the current system, imperfect tho it is.

[SkyShroud.2865]

@Arbriel.4397 said:How will this new change affect my choice of playing GW2. For instance I don't only play WvW but I also play with other friends from across other worlds, with that gone how will I be able to play with them outside of WvW? And are we only getting to choose ONE guild or will we still have 5, but 1 can be a WvW guild?

Nothing change for pve, you don't have to designate any wvw guilds if you are just playing pve.

[Rampage.7145]

@Blaeys.3102 said:If they had implemented this on day one, I could see it working. But, after five years, many people have developed multiple ties to different communities on their server. It isn't uncommon for someone to WvW with one guild on Monday and one with a different playstyle on Tuesday.

Under the proposed system, that will be pretty much gone for all practical purposes. Because of alliance limits, most harder core wvw guilds will be very picky about who is (and who isn't) in their alliance. The people running the alliance will have no choice but to look for the most competitive guilds to group with - regardless of how tight their current communities are. The players that join them for a night or two - and then run with more casual groups later in the week (and there are a lot more of these kinds of wvwers than you might think) - will now be forced to either make a larger commitment to WvW or risk missing out entirely.

In the past five years, servers have banded together. They have bought expensive teamspeak servers and websites. They have set up fun little theme nights for less hardcore players. They have built ties based around things other than how good a player someone is.

The proposed alliance system will harm that. Again, if it had been like this from day one, it wouldn't be an issue. But asking this of the community five years in makes me think that Anet has grown out of touch with the real in-game communities (which aren't really represented here on the wvw forums, btw).

Sorry but i think as you can read on the comments, the vast majority of players are very greatfull for this, only one out of touch is you if you think server comunities mean anything anymore to the vast mojority of players, sure it mean something for some people but most poeple (vast majority) just wanna log in have fun with their friends we dont really care about virtual chatrooms with random people (pretty much what server are nowdays), if you enjoy playing with people i think you will have plenty of time to organize those people into a big alliance and keep enjoying the game together.If you in the other hand just wanna be a hardcore player you can join a hardcore WvW guild, if you just wanna leech kills from a WvW guild tho well u havea choice of joining them or just do you own thing.As a long time WvW commander (maguuma since day 1) and guild leader i can tell you this is hands down the best change ever happened to this game, WvW is mean to be done with 3 teams engaging each other constantly, the server system does not allow that to happen consistently and it has always been been flawed since day 1 they are finally willing to fix 5 years later and we (vast majority of players) thank arenanet for it.If you are attached to some virtual server just let me tell you something, granted u are not friends with every single person that plays in your server this system allows to to actually filter people u dont like or want to play with, if after this u still think servers mean something u should just go out more, spend some quality time with friends.

[SkyShroud.2865]

@"BlazeQ.1095" said:So the NA servers have very few guild that run in certain time zones. For example the "OCX" time zones. What is there to prevent the OCX guilds from creating an alliance that puts the majority of them on a single server eliminating any chance of coverage balance?

Good point, reposted for awareness.